This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

Brampton council rejects punishment for colleague

Council votes to merely issue a warning, after city’s integrity commissioner had advised docking John Sprovieri 60 days’ pay for leaking internal emails to media.

Brampton Councillor John Sprovieri avoided being docked 60 days' pay when a majority of councillors decided his leaks of internal emails to media merited only a warning. (DAVID COOPER / TORONTO STAR) | Order this photo

Brampton council voted Wednesday to reject the advice of the city’s integrity commissioner to dock a councillor 60 days’ pay for forwarding emails to the media.

The recommendation followed a complaint made to the integrity commissioner by Mayor Linda Jeffrey, who feared Councillor John Sprovieri leaked information to the media that may have jeopardized the city’s defence in an ongoing lawsuit.

This summer, Sprovieri shared with the Star and the Brampton Guardian various internal emails, including one sent to councillors by acting chief administrative officer Marilyn Ball telling them she’d ordered city staff not to respond to councillors’ public inquiries about the $28.5-million lawsuit.

The city is being sued by development company Inzola, which alleges it was unfairly disqualified from bidding on a $500-million downtown redevelopment that has been mired in controversy. In its statement of claim, the company alleges city staff and former mayor Susan Fennell were biased in favour of the eventual bid winner, Dominus Construction. The city, in its response to the lawsuit, denied the allegations and said they were an attempt to smear Fennell.

Article Continued Below

(No wrongdoing is alleged against Dominus, and Dominus has stated it followed all of the bidding rules.)

Public court documents in the lawsuit appear to support allegations that staff misled council about the deal before they approved it in 2011.

Sprovieri, who has been trying to get answers to his questions about the deal since 2012, was asked by the Star this summer for details about a $2-million lease extension to house city staff outside of the expanded city hall. Councillors told the Star they didn’t know about the lease. Sprovieri told the Star he was trying to get answers about it. He then forwarded the email from Ball, which instructs staff not to publicly respond.

The city’s integrity commissioner, Robert Swayze, acknowledged during Wednesday’s council meeting that Ball’s email was not marked “confidential,” but ruled that sharing it was still a violation of the city’s code of conduct. He recommended docking Sprovieri 60 days’ pay.

Councillors rejected that advice, instead voting to issue a warning to Sprovieri that he could face that penalty if he violates the code again.

Before the vote, Jeffrey referred to Sprovieri’s efforts to learn and share details of the development project, saying that in her 24 years of politics, she had “never seen anything, ever, as I have seen in the last year as mayor — it’s shocking … I didn’t launch this (complaint) frivolously.”

Jeffrey and Swayze both said Sprovieri’s efforts could harm the city’s legal defence.

But most of his council colleagues came to his defence, pointing to his good reputation over 27 years in office, his passion about the issue, and the fact this was the first time he’d been found guilty of such a violation.

Councillor Gael Miles lashed out at Sprovieri, and tried, unsuccessfully, to introduce her own motion to dock his pay. “It’s time to quit using the media as a forum,” Miles said.

She asked Swayze if Sprovieri could be prevented from participating in future closed-session meetings dealing with the lawsuit, which must be done in private. “I just want him to stop,” she said. Swayze replied that he didn’t think excluding him was possible.

Sprovieri, who excused himself for the debate and the vote on Wednesday, told the Star the following day: “I respect my council colleagues’ deliberation on this issue. I respect and accept their decision. I have never knowingly communicated confidential material or information from closed session to anyone that I’m prohibited from sharing that information with. I will continue to uphold my oath of office and my council mandate to defend the truth and protect the taxpayers of Brampton.”

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com